Is this any good?

[leftcurl]

i was just having a think about my next lens and as i want to explore lighting and portraits a bit more i was thinking of a prime 85mm or 135mm.

i've come across a Canon 135mm F2.8 with 'soft focus'. There's a couple on ebay for around the £200 mark... and whilst it looks a bit cheapo plastic build, i was wondering if anyone had used one before and if it was worth the money.

i'm a great believer in 'testing the water' with as little outlay as possible and thought this would be ideal to kick off with while i was investing in lighting set ups at the same time.

not too fussed about the soft focus thing and it's a bit dated now anyway.. but a 135mm f2.8 seems a good place to start.

any feedback?

 

[TCR4x4]

Gets pretty good reviews here

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=35&sort=7&cat=2&page=1

 

[squishy]

The 85mm f/1.8 would be the other obvious choice.

 

[chris321]

I'd also recommend the 85mm f/1.8. If you're thinking of portraits, you should be able to get a little closer to make up for the shorter focal length, and the larger aperture will let you do some nice creative things with DOF.

 

[leftcurl]

I'd also recommend the 85mm f/1.8. If you're thinking of portraits, you should be able to get a little closer to make up for the shorter focal length, and the larger aperture will let you do some nice creative things with DOF.

The 85mm f/1.8 would be the other obvious choice.

yeh... the 85mm was what i was originally planning on going for.. but i already have the 50mm 1.8 and didn't know if the 85mm would make that much difference :shrug: age old question i guess!

Gets pretty good reviews here

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=35&sort=7&cat=2&page=1

yes, i'd have expected some mixed reviews maybe, but it seems that it 'does what it says on the tin' kinda thing.

 

[HoppyUK]

It's a case of you get what you pay for.

135 SF is a very old design and not brilliantly made by modern standards. It works well enough as you would expect, but I sold mine after the SF novelty wore off - which I now do with a filter and it's more controllable TBH.

If you don't want the SF feature, I wouldn't. On the other hand, 135L 2 is a fab portrait lens on full frame (85 is a bit too short I think).

 

[leftcurl]

It's a case of you get what you pay for.

135 SF is a very old design and not brilliantly made by modern standards. It works well enough as you would expect, but I sold mine after the SF novelty wore off - which I now do with a filter and it's more controllable TBH.

If you don't want the SF feature, I wouldn't. On the other hand, 135L 2 is a fab portrait lens on full frame (85 is a bit too short I think).

thanks for staying up so late to answer that one hoppy

i think the 135mm is the way to go with FF like you say.. whether that's the SF version as a cheaper option or the f2 L version at treble the money (2nd hand).

better get my 'bigma' flogged then and get some wonga in